Need help with DCB Legal PCN. Thank you.

DisruptiveLad

The number plate has no space. It may be challenged on that alone? 

KeithP

With a Claim Issue Date of 26th January, and having filed an Acknowledgment of Service in a timely manner, you have until 4pm on Monday 28th February 2022 to file your Defence.

That's over two weeks away. Plenty of time to produce a Defence, but please don't leave it to the last minute.

To create a Defence, and then file a Defence by email, look at the second post in the NEWBIES thread.

Don't miss the deadline for filing a Defence.

Do not try and file a Defence via the MoneyClaimOnline website. Once an Acknowledgment of Service has been filed, the MCOL website should be treated as 'read only'.

MaludoliM

Good morning 
I had a look at possibility of making my defence condensed and that is what i came up  with. 
"The Defendant is and was at the time in question an electric wheelchair user who suffering from page long list of health conditions that qualified him to be classed as Disabled and in fact he was and is still in recipient of PIP at Enhanced Rate and ESA being assessed and placed in Support Group.  Those health issues play a role in everyday decision-making, as expected, and events in question were no exception. Furthermore, such circumstances should be foreseen by the Claimant and were not.

It was raining and dark due to weather conditions. No signs restricting parking possibilities or so-called contracts were visible as the Defendant drove and parked His car. No other Disabled parking bays were available. There was Car parked on the right of the bay obstructing usage of this bay and there was huge water puddle going from left corner at beginning of the bay diagonally to right continuing underneath car that was obstructing safe use of this bay. The defendant had no option other than park the way he did to keep Him from harm and His family safe at that time as well as to protect His and other Driver privet property from being damage and possible consequences. In doing so the Defendant actions did not stop anyone from parking in this car park as there was no other spaces around His vehicle. The Defendant did not cause any financial loss to the Claimant parking in the way he did. Sign that the Claimant is using as proof is inaccessible to the Defendant,  unreadable and not clear."

Would you please let me know, knowing what i wrote before , is that enough or did i omit something important that i need to add here?

Thank you for your time and effort 

My best regards 

go-on-then

Remove the capital letters where not needed e.g.   Disabled    His    Car  etc 

MaludoliM

go-on-then said:

Remove the capital letters where not needed e.g.   Disabled    His    Car  etc 

Will do. Thank you. 
I'm so bad in English - sorry.
Best regards 

go-on-then

You could use something along the lines of -

The defendant is, and was at the time in question, a valid blue badge holder who uses an electric wheelchair on a daily basis due to many disabilities, several of which affect mobility.

The defendant was a valid customer of the Range store at the time of the alleged offence.  There was only 1 disabled space available near to store and it must be noted that the vehicle in the bay to the right of this empty bay had parked far too close to their line.  It must also be noted that there was a huge water puddle across the whole of the defendant's bay due to very poor weather conditions on that day.  To ensure the defendant parked their vehicle in such a manner as to make it safe for themselves and other passengers to exit and re-enter the vehicle without any harm they had no option but to park further to the left.  In doing so the defendant noted that there were no further parking bays around their vehicle and therefore concluded it would be safe to do so. The defendant was also conscious of damage to either vehicle should they park too close to the neighbouring one.

Upon completing shopping and exiting the Range store the defendant noted the Claimant's signage.  This was facing in towards the store entrance, away from parked or approaching vehicles.  The signage used is not in a position that is easily visible as it is mounted too high and uses miniscule and excessive lettering that is impossible to read either in a vehicle or standing directly underneath it.  By not being placed at eyesight level,  right in front of a disabled bay, it also does not take the Equality Act 2010 into account.
Therefore the Claimant's proof of signage must be dismissed as deliberately confusing and misleading. 

MaludoliM

Good afternoon 
Thank you so much for this i like the way it is written. 
Anyone else have any other suggestion?
My best regards 

KeithP

Are you planning on slotting that text into the suggested template Defence?

MaludoliM

Good evening 
I'm awaiting suggestions and possible add on, corrections etc. 
Why?
My best regards 

KeithP

My best regards to you too.

Are you planning to use the template Defence or not?

As to why I am asking... I am just trying to point you in the right direction.